User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1163 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 23, 2013
    9
    Now this is what a book-to-film adaptation is supposed to be like. Catching Fire might be the best interpreted example I've ever seen. The director, Francis Lawrence, seemed to really understand that books, unlike the previous director, Gary Ross, who seemed to miss some key symbolism. Lawrence cuts certain elements from the books, as well as some scenes and characters entirely, but heNow this is what a book-to-film adaptation is supposed to be like. Catching Fire might be the best interpreted example I've ever seen. The director, Francis Lawrence, seemed to really understand that books, unlike the previous director, Gary Ross, who seemed to miss some key symbolism. Lawrence cuts certain elements from the books, as well as some scenes and characters entirely, but he doesn't miss almost any key sequences that give meaning to the story. The only thing I wish he would've made more like the book was Katniss Everdeen's interaction with Plutarch Heavensbee. In the book, there was a tiny bit of foreshadowing that I would've liked to see in the film. But that's it. That's the only thing in the entire book that was left out that should've potentially been included. That just amazes me how on point they were here. The increased budget also showed. The effects were better, as was the acting. Obviously Jennifer Lawrence is an amazing actress but the rest of the cast also did remarkably well (Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Jena Malone, Lenny Kravitz, etc.). Bottom line, regardless of whether or not you read the books, this movie stands alone as an outstanding viewing experience. I can't wait to see how they portray the third book. Expand
  2. Nov 27, 2013
    10
    Fans of the Hunger Games were dissapointed with the first movie and rightfully so. The film was pretty good, but didn't do the book justice, as it was extremely toned down and nowhere near as in depth as the book was. With a new director for the second book, they did not make the same mistake twice. As someone who has read all the books, I can tell you that Catching Fire is page for pageFans of the Hunger Games were dissapointed with the first movie and rightfully so. The film was pretty good, but didn't do the book justice, as it was extremely toned down and nowhere near as in depth as the book was. With a new director for the second book, they did not make the same mistake twice. As someone who has read all the books, I can tell you that Catching Fire is page for page exactly like the book. It was so amazing how much of the book is captured on the screen, as I actually saw the scenes play out the exact same way they did in my head when I first read Catching Fire. Everything down to the last detail is perfect! Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson return and are both fantastic, so good in fact, that I really wonder if Suzanne Collins had them in mind when she wrote this series. The casting is perfect, the acting is perfect, and the direction is perfect. For those of you who never read the series and didn't really see what was so special about the first film, I really suggest that you give this film a chance. I won't give anything away, but this isn't what you expect, especially the ending, and while there are two more films remaining, this will be your last look inside the arena. After Catching Fire, the series turns into something completely different and that's what I love about it. It would have been simple to have three books about the games, but the games are actually a small part of the second film, and won't take place in the next two films. Rarely do I give a film 5 stars, but the second Hunger Games film is done so much better than the first. They don't hold anything back in this one, and you are introduced to a whole other set of unique characters, that you will be seeing in the other films. The cast is brilliant and new Director, Francis Lawrence, manages to capture essence of the book and bring it to life on the big screen, with unbelievable detail. If you didn't read the books and just don't understand what's so great about this series, go see this movie. Expand
  3. Dec 7, 2013
    8
    Like its predecessor, Catching Fire is a refreshingly original and thought provoking blockbuster (a welcome break from those endless superhero movies we just can't seem to be getting enough of). Jennifer Lawrence dazzles once again as Katniss. The handheld camera effect is thankfully restrained this time, but the usually excellent Hoffman delivers a surprisingly underwhelming performanceLike its predecessor, Catching Fire is a refreshingly original and thought provoking blockbuster (a welcome break from those endless superhero movies we just can't seem to be getting enough of). Jennifer Lawrence dazzles once again as Katniss. The handheld camera effect is thankfully restrained this time, but the usually excellent Hoffman delivers a surprisingly underwhelming performance and the script while mostly air tight does succumb to the occasional loophole. Expand
  4. Dec 15, 2013
    9
    Great movie.

    The first half in particular is exceptional, fresh after the events of the first movie it does an amazing job at showing us the ramification of those events. It also fixes all the issues of the first movie by properly building the world this time around so you can understand the gravity of what's at stake, and by making that world truly feel tri-dimensional. All of that
    Great movie.

    The first half in particular is exceptional, fresh after the events of the first movie it does an amazing job at showing us the ramification of those events. It also fixes all the issues of the first movie by properly building the world this time around so you can understand the gravity of what's at stake, and by making that world truly feel tri-dimensional. All of that while also keeping a perfect pace.

    The second half is still pretty good, but not as good. The problem is that it focuses too much on what's going on in the dome right there instead of showing us what it means on a larger scale, and as a result the movie does lose some of the depth it had built during the first half.

    Still, it's a massive improvement over the previous one which was already quite good. Can't wait for the next one!
    Expand
  5. Nov 23, 2013
    8
    Catching Fire is a great piece of entertainment that shines around Jennifer Lawrence. A movie that is equally as good as its predecessor but with a much darker and mature tone. For being a middle movie in a trilogy, Catching Fire succeeds.
  6. Nov 25, 2013
    9
    Easily outperformed the first Hunger Games and shows a real interest level throughout. Special effects are top notch and much better this time around. The performances are striking and the visuals in both movies are what have sold it to me. It is shocking how convincing the utopian future looks so out there yet so believable with its heavy use of eye shadow and solid color paletteEasily outperformed the first Hunger Games and shows a real interest level throughout. Special effects are top notch and much better this time around. The performances are striking and the visuals in both movies are what have sold it to me. It is shocking how convincing the utopian future looks so out there yet so believable with its heavy use of eye shadow and solid color palette lighting. This movie is good go see it. Expand
  7. Dec 5, 2013
    9
    I thought the movie was good except for the ending because it just did not seem right..................................................................
  8. Dec 26, 2013
    8
    A very very very strong 8.5 out of 10. November gave us the best blockbuster of 2013. Man of Steel was the best comic book movie of the year but this one surpasses it. I was very impressed. Big improvement over the first one. Great and better acting, great story, great characters especially the two leading ones, one of the best female characters ever, great twists, great pacing (it´s longA very very very strong 8.5 out of 10. November gave us the best blockbuster of 2013. Man of Steel was the best comic book movie of the year but this one surpasses it. I was very impressed. Big improvement over the first one. Great and better acting, great story, great characters especially the two leading ones, one of the best female characters ever, great twists, great pacing (it´s long but it doesn´t feel like it and you really don´t want it to end), spectacular scenes, emotive, deep, touching. It was so on point. There were so many subtle things I´m sure most people didn´t even notice. Even about sexuality, sexual orientation and male and female roles. Perfect film for all ages. So impressed. Expand
  9. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    Better than the first movie in every way, 'Catching Fire' exposes a stronger heroine than ever, not only physical issues but mainly mental, Katniss is, without a doubt, one of the most interesting characters that you can find nowadays, the first hour is incredibly good as it proposes, developing characters, story, and feeding Katniss more and more. The second hour, does not get back,Better than the first movie in every way, 'Catching Fire' exposes a stronger heroine than ever, not only physical issues but mainly mental, Katniss is, without a doubt, one of the most interesting characters that you can find nowadays, the first hour is incredibly good as it proposes, developing characters, story, and feeding Katniss more and more. The second hour, does not get back, amazing scenes (smart scenes), to feed the viewer.
    Katniss never let love take all your mind, because she knows she has more important things to worry about, but when love takes the screen, it's hard not to surrender, and with the passage of minutes, until the final scene Katniss and the public, are hungry, hungry for more.
    Expand
  10. Dec 29, 2013
    3
    These films are unbelievably boring I'm told the books are epic but clearly something is lost in the adaption. The characters are bland at best and to be honest if they all died at the start of the next movie and were replaced but a crate full of painted gibbons they would be more interested. I haven't read the books but please someone tell me that they all die in the end...... bland blandThese films are unbelievably boring I'm told the books are epic but clearly something is lost in the adaption. The characters are bland at best and to be honest if they all died at the start of the next movie and were replaced but a crate full of painted gibbons they would be more interested. I haven't read the books but please someone tell me that they all die in the end...... bland bland bland lord of the flies meh Expand
  11. LTR
    Nov 23, 2013
    8
    This is a great movie in the Hunger Games series. The story is great, the characters are great and the hunger games itself is way more enjoyable and creative.
  12. Nov 25, 2013
    8
    Following the success of the first Hunger Games, Catching Fire does what a good sequel should do, focus on the consequences that came with the decisions made in the first film. In some ways I prefer this to the first film and in some ways I don't. This film has better acting, better visuals and a much more interesting story that focuses on the actions of characters rather than charactersFollowing the success of the first Hunger Games, Catching Fire does what a good sequel should do, focus on the consequences that came with the decisions made in the first film. In some ways I prefer this to the first film and in some ways I don't. This film has better acting, better visuals and a much more interesting story that focuses on the actions of characters rather than characters in action. It didn't give me a feeling of closure like the first film though. The first film can stand on its own as a good science fiction film, whereas this film still does feel like a sequel. It doesn't stand on its own but it still continues a great story and I enjoyed it. Expand
  13. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    This is one of those times where the sequel actually plays better than the first. This movie actually carried better than the book also. Lots of internal drama and lack of a clear plot line make this better for teenagers and older but overall a good experience.
  14. Nov 23, 2013
    10
    I don't believe that a sequel will be much better and highly enjoyable than its predecessor. Here on this film, all of the elements of the film cinematography, acting skills, plot, and imagine the dramatic violence have been upgraded superbly. This is the trilogy that will make you hungry to watch all of its movies even when you are busy.

    Katniss Everdeen known as the famous star,
    I don't believe that a sequel will be much better and highly enjoyable than its predecessor. Here on this film, all of the elements of the film cinematography, acting skills, plot, and imagine the dramatic violence have been upgraded superbly. This is the trilogy that will make you hungry to watch all of its movies even when you are busy.

    Katniss Everdeen known as the famous star, Jennifer Lawrence has come up to the stage again for her strong and unique performance along with Peeta Melark, known as Josh Hutcherson which is now more brave and unusual compare to the last film. They fight against the evil Capitol which is ruled by President Snow main antagonist because of the events of the last film.

    Hunger Games Catching Fire not only provides more of the 3D and visual effects but also the film manages to introduce the characters one by one which makes it more of a straight line. And add up the thrilling scenes. Here the experience of thrill just been more of a horror than ever before.

    Hunger Games Catching Fire is really a very good and possibly one of the best films on this year. So I highly recommend everyone to watch it. It really saves your money when you watch it on theatre and preferably on 3D. For those who didn't like the Hunger Games (the predecessor) pretty much, well this sequel will definitely transformed you into a fan of the trilogy.

    The Hunger Games Catching Fire Rating 10 10
    Compared to -
    The Hunger Games (the predecessor) Rating 8 10
    Expand
  15. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    Amazing film, and I can't wait to see it again! The fact that it follows the book fairly well is a huge two thumbs up! Nothing is worse than a film based on a book that doesn't follow the book at all. So again I repeat, I truly enjoyed this film.
  16. Nov 23, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was very disappointed after reading the Catching Fire book. The movie was good, I was just expecting more out of the book, I feel if they had added on 10 more minutes, nearly all the books info would have been covered. There wasn't enough out of the training, Katniss' friend (the Avox) was never addressed, and there was more, but I'm having trouble remembering through my frustration. Expand
  17. Nov 26, 2013
    8
    Great overall movie but her crying was way too overtop constant (but really funny). A little graphic for some viewers. I`ve read both books and this might have been my favorite, except for the train scene, witch was shortened. Also the poison cleansing scene is over the top and sounds like a different sort of movie.
  18. Dec 8, 2013
    8
    The new V for Vendetta, awaiting the next shows a future where tyranny dominates the reigns Nazism, a new vision and hope our princess, win so that our future generation see what not to do.
  19. Jan 27, 2014
    10
    A must watch !, this movie is well done. This time there's no sharky cameras, that's an improvement. It's start only at the middle of the movie, but personally its a 2h30 film that passed so fast !
  20. Dec 12, 2013
    10
    A real Hit compared to the first movie, One hell of a Action thriller movie, And very enjoyable for those who have read the books, I would strongly recommend seeing this or buying it when it comes out on dvd.
  21. Jan 26, 2014
    10
    "Absolutely sublime from start to finish and I will jam forks into my eyes if I ever use those words to describe anything again." - Yahtzee/Zero Punctuation
  22. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    This film was amazing! So much better than the first. The characters were so much more believable and the visuals were stunning. This is probably my favourite film of the year!
  23. Dec 1, 2013
    0
    wow i cant believe this is rated good its boring and the hype shouldent be here considering how bad the first one is just fan of the books giving it good rating that annoys me so much
  24. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    This one is awesome in every way. Every aspects and action sequences are far way better than the first one. They improve everything from storytelling to character development. You'll get whatever you expect and sometimes it is more than you wish for. There's no stopping for the thrill they give. Every minute, there's a build up of the story. Jennifer Lawrence delivers a true heroine in herThis one is awesome in every way. Every aspects and action sequences are far way better than the first one. They improve everything from storytelling to character development. You'll get whatever you expect and sometimes it is more than you wish for. There's no stopping for the thrill they give. Every minute, there's a build up of the story. Jennifer Lawrence delivers a true heroine in her character.
    It is a true satisfaction and a must-see.
    Expand
  25. Nov 27, 2013
    4
    It just didn't do it for me. Terrible acting, CGI wasn't great, and the romance took up way too much time. I should stop seeing the movies of books I like.
  26. Nov 29, 2013
    1
    I am confused, saddened, and downright appalled at the hype for this "movie." I would have gotten up and left but I didn't drive. I have only walked out of one movie in my lifetime. This should have been the second time.

    First, I suppose it's a feat, albeit negative, to appear both never ending and rushed simultaneously. There was so much unnecessary detail that the parts or moments
    I am confused, saddened, and downright appalled at the hype for this "movie." I would have gotten up and left but I didn't drive. I have only walked out of one movie in my lifetime. This should have been the second time.

    First, I suppose it's a feat, albeit negative, to appear both never ending and rushed simultaneously. There was so much unnecessary detail that the parts or moments that should have had more detail were sloppily and hastily thrown together just to make sense of what happened in the book. The viewers deserved more after sitting through all of the blandness that they had to endure leading up to the quell.

    Second, the story line is unoriginal and generic. It bears little difference to every other high school novel in which a futuristic government has a sinister plan and plays the public like puppets, resulting in some "twist" where it is not all what it seems. Been there, done that.

    The "funny" parts weren't funny. They were scarce thankfully, but the attempts in this movie to be humorous, sarcastic or witty were pathetic at best. Laughs in the theater were painfully random and misplaced, where I was left wondering who was more out of touch: the writers or the misguided and love struck viewers?

    I could go on an on about my disappointment in this "movie," however, sitting through it once is bad enough and I'd prefer not to relive it. If I were to sum it all up in one sentence it would have to be "They are just trying too hard." The overabundance of detail, the separation into parts in an attempt to hide the fact that it's the same old story we've all read before just packaged differently, and the supposedly quirky and edgy names the characters were given just appear as weak pleas for acceptance. At times I wonder if the movie only is afloat because of the heartthrob status of its actors/actresses.

    Overall, I give it a 1 for the presence of Lenny Kravitz, although honestly, the character was completely non-essential to the plot and it just seemed like he was there to add interest to the movie. However, the whole movie is so far gone that adding him is just the only drop in the bucket towards giving this movie any positive appeal at all.
    Expand
  27. Dec 3, 2013
    8
    Having not read the book, but having had my brother try to explain it all to me one time, I was able to follow along the plot pretty well. The action is well paced and the special effects are very well done. Parts of the movie are a (lite) delve into the terrible world of PTSD, and while I found them to be accurate enough, they were naturally somewhat emotionally draining. I think thatHaving not read the book, but having had my brother try to explain it all to me one time, I was able to follow along the plot pretty well. The action is well paced and the special effects are very well done. Parts of the movie are a (lite) delve into the terrible world of PTSD, and while I found them to be accurate enough, they were naturally somewhat emotionally draining. I think that almost anyone who likes sci-fi action movies will be happy to see this film. Expand
  28. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    My God, this movie was absolutely amazing. The first movie was pretty good, but it was a masterpiece. Catching Fire, on the other hand, tops it almost every way. Acting was excellent, story was really good, music, visuals, makeup all of it. When I read the book I though the first half outside the games was good but not great. But they made it a whole lot more interesting in this adaption.My God, this movie was absolutely amazing. The first movie was pretty good, but it was a masterpiece. Catching Fire, on the other hand, tops it almost every way. Acting was excellent, story was really good, music, visuals, makeup all of it. When I read the book I though the first half outside the games was good but not great. But they made it a whole lot more interesting in this adaption. One of the few films, where I think the movie was better. Expand
  29. Nov 26, 2013
    10
    one freaking word.....Jennifer Lawrence! and i liked the movie because it was superior to the first movie and its more related to the book even thou it missed some material from the book I still enjoyed the stinking movie
  30. Nov 23, 2013
    3
    Winner of the Most Hyped Disapointment of the Year Award for sure.
    Francis Lawrence attempts to fit all the features of the book into the movie whilst trying to stick to the 2 and a half hour limit, which results in it all looking half assed and rushed, that people seem to be talking over each other and it all goes to the point where I would be happier if they had just left it out, any
    Winner of the Most Hyped Disapointment of the Year Award for sure.
    Francis Lawrence attempts to fit all the features of the book into the movie whilst trying to stick to the 2 and a half hour limit, which results in it all looking half assed and rushed, that people seem to be talking over each other and it all goes to the point where I would be happier if they had just left it out, any character development the book had has been left out, most of the characters' actions get explained perfectly in the book, in the movie it leaves the audience confused. For some inexplicable reason everyone has taken up the practise of cussing at random, and for some reason one of Katniss's prep team was killed offscreen.
    Please try harder in the future Francis Lawrence, for the sake of the fandom, humanity even.
    Expand
  31. Nov 22, 2013
    4
    This installment of The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, is missing the intense relationships that the first movie had between the actors built up to the games and during the games. you dont even know how half of the players of the game died. The movie is all mixed up and is impossible to follow at points. katniss seemed to have constipation throughout the movie. The ending of the movie was aThis installment of The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, is missing the intense relationships that the first movie had between the actors built up to the games and during the games. you dont even know how half of the players of the game died. The movie is all mixed up and is impossible to follow at points. katniss seemed to have constipation throughout the movie. The ending of the movie was a buzz kill. Wont say anymore because I dont want to ruin it for people who did not see it yet. I will say that it does not come close to the first movie. Hope the director has something hidden in his pocket to bring this movie back to life. Expand
  32. Dec 1, 2013
    5
    Too dark and dreary. Katniss's character is all over the place. Characters appear with almost no preparation for them. Confusing and guilty of a recent annoyance: same-face-casting. That is, too many characters either look alike or are interchangeable. Makes the first film seem like GWTW.
  33. Nov 27, 2013
    9
    great sequal to the movie. great cinematography, music, acting, action, romance, all that good stuff. you don't want to miss it if you saw the first one.
  34. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    Bigger and better than the first film of the franchise, Catching Fire fixes the mistakes made by its predecessor, doing justice to the source novel. As always, Jennifer Lawrence outshines every other member of the talented cast.
  35. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" picks up exactly where the last film left off, continuing the sparks of rebellion. This film takes everything that was great about the first film and makes it significantly better. The characters are more defined, the special effects are better, the score is more bombastic, writing is stronger, and the overall feel is grander. The themes of hope that lurks"The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" picks up exactly where the last film left off, continuing the sparks of rebellion. This film takes everything that was great about the first film and makes it significantly better. The characters are more defined, the special effects are better, the score is more bombastic, writing is stronger, and the overall feel is grander. The themes of hope that lurks in the series are exemplified even further as the stakes are higher and the amount of freedom is slowly withering away.

    Directing is really the main highlight of this film. The new director, Francis Lawrence, keeps the overall feel of the series, but brings greater control and precise attention to detail to the onscreen action and drama. The action is easier to see and choreographed really well. Interesting shots are used to cover up the grotesque level of violence, but they are no less impactful than actually seeing it. The use of a much steadier camera really makes taking in everything easier. The level of emotion is effectively presented on screen and the use of music excels everything to a more heart touching level. Even though the film is more emotional, it still manages to have some moments of humor spread throughout. The script is tight and really develops these characters that we’ve grown to love. While the social commentary on reality television is on the lacking side, the themes of hope, freedom, trust, and unity are far more assessed.

    While many of the older characters return, there are many new ones introduced. First things first, Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen is still one of my favorite characters of all time and I love her here as much as I did before. However, she doesn’t grow as a character as much this time around. She’s more struggling with her inner demons as she tries to find herself at the helms of this new revolution that is around the corner. Peeta on the other hand, grows a lot. He’s more confident and less dependent on Katniss. He can hold his own and even takes the initiative a few times. Effie even goes through some character growth as we see her love for her tributes. Woody Harrelson as Haymitch is still the wise cracking drunk, but has become more generous and caring. While our returning characters are great, the newer additions are just as awesome. The two standouts for me are Finnick and Johanna. Finnick is not only a great looking guy, but has a heart of gold. He seems vain with ulterior motives, but he proves himself to be caring and protective. Johanna is a total bad girl. She’s really in your face, a bit psychotic, and a powerful warrior. However, she can even manage to be funny. All the characters are great including the additions of the new ones. They all get good screen time and development and we can really care for them, unlike the first film where the side characters took a seat to the more interesting Katniss.

    Overall “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” is a great follow up to “The Hunger Games.” Everything is better from directing to writing to the use of music. It really expands on the universe and sets itself up for the next two films. The stakes are higher and there are a lot more to care about. I give it 4.5/5, a great sequel that builds up on the original to deliver a really great cinematic experience.
    Expand
  36. Nov 22, 2013
    6
    Jennifer Lawrence has such an expressive face that you have to be sure it is her from one frame of film to the next. I am not a fan of films like "The Hunger Games" but her face and acting grabbed me in that first film just as it does in this sequel, "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" which is the second of 4 films that will make up the three volumes of the original story. Like mostJennifer Lawrence has such an expressive face that you have to be sure it is her from one frame of film to the next. I am not a fan of films like "The Hunger Games" but her face and acting grabbed me in that first film just as it does in this sequel, "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" which is the second of 4 films that will make up the three volumes of the original story. Like most sequels this is more opf a holding pattern to set up the next two films. The film, Jennifer Lawrence and some of the supporting players will get you through this way too long film that could have easily been cut to run 2 hours instead of the 2 hours and 26 minutes.

    The screenplay written by Simon Beaufoy and Michael deBruyn, based on the novel by Francis Lawrence (no relation to the actress) provide the screen with action, color, blood and just a few spots that drag. The production designer provides good background and costume designer certainly deserves accolades, including those that over the line.

    This new film brings back 24 winners of previous games with only 1 who can win. The government seems to interfere more with the games than it did in the first film but this is because President Snow (Donald Southerland) of Panem sees Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) as a threat to his rule and wants to eliminate her thinking that will stop the brewing revolution. Katniss not only has to defend herself with the possibility of having to kill Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) who is in love with her but she is also put in a position of having to choose between Peeta and Gale (Liam Hemsworth) who confuses her with a kiss before she goes off to fight.

    Stanley Tucci chews up the scenery more than he did in the first film while the makeup, wigs and costumes upstages the wearer of all 3 Elizabeth Banks. Woody Harrelson shines as the mentor of both Katniss and Peeta putting himself in position to betray one of them. Lenny Kravitz stands out, once again, as the designer of Katniss's dresses.

    Newcomers to the franchise are Philip Seymour Hoffman who plays more calm than he has in other films while Amanda Plummer, Jeffrey Wright, Lynn Cohen and Jena Malone all bring strong characters to life as competitors in the games. Another game player is Sam Claflin who takes over the screen whenever he is on it, as a egotistical, handsome and, with a 6 pack stomach, gets quite a few sighs.

    As an in between sequel to set up the last two films in the franchise "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" drags a bit here and there but then you can always look at Jennifer Lawrence's face as it almost imperceptibility changes.
    Expand
  37. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    One could be forgiven for thinking that, after the original film, this second installment would disintegrate into repetition and boredom as is often the case with sequels. Happily this is not so, for whilst it may follow the same narrative formula as before this is turning into a franchise of real quality. It's definitely not just another popcorn movie but is a very accomplished piece ofOne could be forgiven for thinking that, after the original film, this second installment would disintegrate into repetition and boredom as is often the case with sequels. Happily this is not so, for whilst it may follow the same narrative formula as before this is turning into a franchise of real quality. It's definitely not just another popcorn movie but is a very accomplished piece of film making in its own right. The setting and costumes continue to be very imaginative. It has a good story enhanced by tight editing keeping the whole thing extremely tense and compelling, and the effects are special. It has to be said that Jennifer Lawrence is turning out to be a great asset for the series and after this one I'm now anticipating the third with some eagerness. Expand
  38. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    This is a fantastic film even better than the first. The dark tones mixed with the perfect amount of humor mixed with top notch acting makes this one of the best films of the year. A
  39. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    In comparison to its predecessor, I won't say that "Catching Fire" disappoints, but it did not really go as tremendous as I thought it was going to be. The first hour, for me, was a bit too slow-paced, but it gets way better right after the moment Katniss stood up for Gale over the Peacekeeper Commander. What I love the most is the portrayal of Johanna Mason by Jena Malone and FinnickIn comparison to its predecessor, I won't say that "Catching Fire" disappoints, but it did not really go as tremendous as I thought it was going to be. The first hour, for me, was a bit too slow-paced, but it gets way better right after the moment Katniss stood up for Gale over the Peacekeeper Commander. What I love the most is the portrayal of Johanna Mason by Jena Malone and Finnick Odair by Sam Caiflin. I honestly didn't expect it from them both. Overall, Catching Fire is a good sequel, but not flawless. The ending hits just right because it makes you feel you want the next movie right at that second. Expand
  40. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    Not having read the book, I'm sure fanboy/girls are whining about what they left out. Not all of us have time to nerd out and read all the books. That being said, I really enjoyed the movie! With one more book left being split into two, which makes sense(more money) I was entertained! The acting was solid special effects, and drama excellent! Go!
  41. Jan 22, 2014
    0
    This film, like many of its kind, was made for one reason and one reason only. To make money. This film has no art, no honesty, no truth, zero passion. This is complete trash, just like Harry Potter. Garbage for kids. Just look at the acting, the actors gave extremely uninspired performances. I hate films like this. Doesn't matter though, they made a bunch of money, and they will makeThis film, like many of its kind, was made for one reason and one reason only. To make money. This film has no art, no honesty, no truth, zero passion. This is complete trash, just like Harry Potter. Garbage for kids. Just look at the acting, the actors gave extremely uninspired performances. I hate films like this. Doesn't matter though, they made a bunch of money, and they will make more films like this forever and ever, because idiots keep going to suck it up. Whatever.. Hope you all don't choke on your trash. Expand
  42. Nov 22, 2013
    4
    A long 'forepaly' and without a climax. Maybe because I never read the original story, it could not appealed me. Some of the plot seem to have bad logic.
  43. Nov 28, 2013
    9
    It's kind of hard to compare Catching FIre to its predecessor without talking about the books. I can say right now that as a movie, Catching Fire is noticeably superior to the Hunger Games, but i'm not sure what to credit that to, an overall better job on moviemaking or just the fact that it's based on a better book. Regardless, this film is significantly more entertaining than theIt's kind of hard to compare Catching FIre to its predecessor without talking about the books. I can say right now that as a movie, Catching Fire is noticeably superior to the Hunger Games, but i'm not sure what to credit that to, an overall better job on moviemaking or just the fact that it's based on a better book. Regardless, this film is significantly more entertaining than the original. It takes a look at the bigger picture of the story. It's no longer about the Hunger games, but the corrupt government that's about to face a revolution and all of the politics in between. It may not be perfect, but it's a fun and exciting movie with strong characters and an interesting story, and it's definitely worth more than one viewing. Expand
  44. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    Catching Fire may have The Hunger Games title attached to it, but this is a much more personal film that opts to expand on the lore of Panem and consequences of the predecessor film, while simultaneously upping the stakes in every conceivable way for what is sure to be a crowd pleasing trilogy capping two-parter. Not only is Catching Fire smart, stylistically entertaining, brilliantlyCatching Fire may have The Hunger Games title attached to it, but this is a much more personal film that opts to expand on the lore of Panem and consequences of the predecessor film, while simultaneously upping the stakes in every conceivable way for what is sure to be a crowd pleasing trilogy capping two-parter. Not only is Catching Fire smart, stylistically entertaining, brilliantly acted, and socially relevant, it manages to avoid coming across as 2 and a half hours of filler for an epic trilogy. That test is reserved for Mockingjay Part 1. Expand
  45. Nov 30, 2013
    0
    Read the review, not the score
    Honestly this is one of the best adaptation i have ever seen, there are a couple scenes from the book that i would have liked to see, but they hit it on the nail. Instead of trying to force the book to fit into a movie, they took the book an re-wrote parts to make it s great movie, without losing any of the meaning in the book. This is easily the best movie
    Read the review, not the score
    Honestly this is one of the best adaptation i have ever seen, there are a couple scenes from the book that i would have liked to see, but they hit it on the nail. Instead of trying to force the book to fit into a movie, they took the book an re-wrote parts to make it s great movie, without losing any of the meaning in the book. This is easily the best movie i have seen this year.
    Expand
  46. Jan 22, 2014
    0
    How is this piece of crap rated 8? The plot makes no sense, the acting is average. The movie itself is an idiotic boring cruel story. Are people really so stupid to enjoy this? It makes me sad...
  47. Dec 15, 2013
    0
    With all great scripts sitting on shelves throughout Hollywood, it's a sad day for American culture when such a disturbing movie gets made. What next, a teenager gang rape trilogy whereby the victims get even at the end of the 3rd production? Innocent children slaughtering/killing innocent children should never be glorified in any culture. There's just no justification for suchWith all great scripts sitting on shelves throughout Hollywood, it's a sad day for American culture when such a disturbing movie gets made. What next, a teenager gang rape trilogy whereby the victims get even at the end of the 3rd production? Innocent children slaughtering/killing innocent children should never be glorified in any culture. There's just no justification for such gratuitous violence. No way this movie should have ever received a PG-13 rating. I would argue that Hunger Games is more of a reflection on how sick Suzanne Collins is rather than the American culture. I'm forbidding our kids to even mention Hunger Games in our household. Expand
  48. Dec 7, 2013
    3
    I don't understand all the hype for these movies, they must be for those who read the books and want to see them acted out on screen.
    The movie is completly boring with about ten minutes of action towards the end.
    How many arrows does she have anyway?
  49. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    One of the greatest movies I've seen in a long time, especially after having read the books three times each. The movie nails all main points from the book and even some of the smaller ones. I don't see how someone could rate this movie negatively, even if it isn't their type of movie.
  50. Nov 22, 2013
    5
    I didn't see a good acting from Jennifer Lawrence or anyone else, except Haymitch Abernathy and Octavia.
    I didn't believe to this "hunger killers" that they participate in terrible game. Where they kill each other. This is bad.
    Who those film amateurs who want to see a movie without meaningless idea and bad acting my advice will be not to see. Movie for one time, maybe with a
    I didn't see a good acting from Jennifer Lawrence or anyone else, except Haymitch Abernathy and Octavia.
    I didn't believe to this "hunger killers" that they participate in terrible game. Where they kill each other. This is bad.
    Who those film amateurs who want to see a movie without meaningless idea and bad acting my advice will be not to see.
    Movie for one time, maybe with a girlfriend in the cinema in another case, maybe better wait for DVD or BR. :)

    I expected more from Jennifer as Oscar winner
    Expand
  51. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    The hunger games catching fire is an amazing movie with high intense action in quarter quell and a love triangle between Latinas peeta and Gale. The movie is by far better than the first one and the first one wasn't bad at all. A must see film.
  52. Dec 9, 2013
    6
    This is a sequel to the movie "The Hunger Games", the second in a series of three, after a book trilogy with the same name.

    I haven't read any of the three books but I saw and liked the first movie. Those who read all three books claim that the second movie is much a better adaptation. That very well may be but I liked the first movie somewhat better. Taking into consideration the
    This is a sequel to the movie "The Hunger Games", the second in a series of three, after a book trilogy with the same name.

    I haven't read any of the three books but I saw and liked the first movie.
    Those who read all three books claim that the second movie is much a better adaptation.
    That very well may be but I liked the first movie somewhat better.

    Taking into consideration the movie's genre (Sci-Fi, Action) I admit that it is done well: directing, cinematography and action.
    Watching it for two and a half hours I did not feel bored. But the first movie had more surprises for me, maybe that is why I expected a bit more.
    Expand
  53. Nov 23, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It was better than the first one... but exactly the same as the first one! More complete lack of tension! More non-violent fighting to the death! No blood! More hiding in the jungle for 90% of the time! (at least she wasn't up a tree the whole bloody time). More engineered killer mist/killer monkeys/killer waves! The only real difference between the two is that at the end of "Catching Fire" there's a potential rebellion.. and then the film ends! And then we get to await another money thieving two-part sequel! Expand
  54. Feb 2, 2014
    8
    Great adaptation of the the world famous teen lit, more so thanks to another great performance by Jennifer Lawrence. The second half went into the same motions, with another dip into the 'arena' but for the first half of the film, we see the start of the rebellion and a surprisingly insightful view of 'heroes' and 'symbols' in such social revolutions.
  55. Nov 27, 2013
    6
    THE HUNGER GAMES (2012, 7/10) is a harbinger of another monolith box-office knockout with quite different teen spirit from TWILIGHT franchise. Its dystopian milieux strike as a resounding backbone to carry its social onus which is unusual to be seen among its peers. As the second part of the trilogy-turns-quartet (a lame strategy when shifts from the source novel to its cinematicTHE HUNGER GAMES (2012, 7/10) is a harbinger of another monolith box-office knockout with quite different teen spirit from TWILIGHT franchise. Its dystopian milieux strike as a resounding backbone to carry its social onus which is unusual to be seen among its peers. As the second part of the trilogy-turns-quartet (a lame strategy when shifts from the source novel to its cinematic adaption), CATCHING FIRE basically is an amped-up survival battle as its predecessor (with an elaborate overture to dovetail its storyline development), new helmer Francis Lawrence (I AM LEGEND 2007, 8/10; CONSTANTINE 2005, 7/10) barely achieves a middle-of-the-road tactic to fulfill his demanding task.

    Since I tend to divide movie from its source material, I am a piece of blank paper towards the plot and its characters’ ominous destiny, so the great pleasure comes from newcomers (name-checking Sam Claflin and Jena Malone) in the series since it did pique my curiosity to know whether they will survive in the end, both actors are camera-friendly and vividly evoke laughters and empathy. So tracking back to the love triangle, Hemsworth’s part is tapering down quickly meanwhile J. Lawrence and Hutcherson manage to breakout from their asymmetrical relationship, although judging from all levels, she looks like a big sister (and caretaker) to him, but which also accomplishes an unorthodox heroine and hero pair against all odds. Tucci and Banks are as excellent as they could be with their flamboyant antics, while veteran Sutherland and Harrelson are unequivocally underemployed as the antagonist and the mentor respectively, plus the new blood Hoffman doesn’t seem to exhaust too much effort to accentuate the final twist.

    So it all strips down to Jennifer Lawrence’s emotional curve out and out, save her swaying affections towards two boys, her awakening sense as a token of rebellion trudges through a laboriously-designed victories’ tour, which also gives Katniss (passively though) a strong conviction what will become her goal in the chapters to come, the great part of the story has just begun!

    I watched it on an IMAX screen, and the effect is no more than satisfactory, during the game time, the CGI looks cheaper and faker than usual top-notch Hollywood output, the entire hue is also a shade darker in view of its 2D default, one can barely get the full idea what is happening during the high points. Brightness aside, the definition of the images is another disappointing factor. So maybe one crucial reason (my own conspiracy theory) is that the cinemas’ apparatus is not equivalent between here in Shanghai and in USA, where it gained raving reviews, but as far as I am concerning, the technique bloopers are too blatant to overlook, markedly mar the movie for me, but I will keep as loyal as possible for the remaining two successors (both will still be under the tiller of Francis Lawrence), just because Julianne Moore is on board now as a key role, god bless the mockingjay!
    Expand
  56. Jan 25, 2014
    2
    If it wasn't for the stupid commentary my sister and I did through out while watching this, I would have been bored to tears. Needlessly wrong, Cut out a ton of key things from the books that were essential to have, and the acting in this film was below average at best, Mainly because of the poorly written dialogue where it seemed that the actors/actresses took the film far too seriously.If it wasn't for the stupid commentary my sister and I did through out while watching this, I would have been bored to tears. Needlessly wrong, Cut out a ton of key things from the books that were essential to have, and the acting in this film was below average at best, Mainly because of the poorly written dialogue where it seemed that the actors/actresses took the film far too seriously.

    To say that this is better than the first film is an absolutely joke. Catching Fire flat out sucked.
    Expand
  57. Nov 23, 2013
    9
    "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" is absolutely fantastic. It's brilliantly acted, powerful, emotional and much more ferociously intense than the first. The directing is smooth, more thought-provoking than the first, and is very faithful to the book. Anyone who loved the first cannot miss out this excellent sequel.
  58. Dec 26, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Fino a che questo resta il film di Attila (sì, cioè, di Donald Sutherland nei perfidi panni del presidente Snow), la seconda puntata della saga tratta dai romanzi di Suzanne Collins funziona in modo soprendente per essere un prodotto segmentato su di un pubblico adolescente. La vittoria congiunta di Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) e Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) nell’episodio precedente ha dimostrato che ci si può ribellare alla società un po’ nazistoide basata sui distretti sottomessi a un ferreo potere centrale: il tour della vittoria fa da scintilla per alcuni focolai di rivolta, così Snow (su viscido consiglio del Plutarch di un Philip Seymour Hoffman sottoutilizzato in maniera clamorosa) trova il modo di ributtare nella mischia la ragazza e il relativo compare di sventura con lo scopo di far fuori almeno lei inventandosi una sfida tra i vincitori ancora in vita. Tutta questa parte sostenuta da un più che discreto ritmo e da una sceneggiatura che riesce a coinvolgere anche lo spettatore di passaggio: c’è il consueto contrasto tra la miseria ovvero l’opacità dei distretti e lo sfarzo colorato della capitale, la scelta delle squadre per la preparazione ai giochi, la sfarzosa presentazione al pubblico in televisione sullo sfondo di scenografie (e all’interno di inquadrature) alla Leni Riefenstahl peccato solo che Stanley Tucci abbia meno spazio nei panni del luciferino presentatore Caesar, mentre Cinna (Lenny Kravitz) si inventa per Katniss un vestito ‘ribelle’ che gli costerà caro. Poi iniziano i giochi veri e propri, causando un vero e proprio crollo di interesse: il nuovo regista Francis Lawrence risparmia al pubblico i faticosissimi (per la vista) traballamenti della camera a mano utilizzata dal predecessore Gary Ross, ma si resta dalle parti del videogame di sopravvivenza pieno di effetti, ma con qualche trovata banale (la nebbia, le scimmie), i personaggi degli altri tributi delineati solo in maniera grossolana e persino i dialoghi che paiono qua e là tirati via. Di positivo c’è che questa seconda parte occupa meno di un terzo della durata complessiva e termina quasi di colpo con un mini-ribaltone dopo il quale manca solo la scritta ‘continua’ sullo schermo, ma, si sa, questo il prezzo da pagare alla trasposizione di successi letterari a puntate. A proposito di durata complessiva: due ore e mezza sono un po’ troppe, una bella bonifica di personaggi e situazioni avrebbe giovato al risultato finale, ma in questi casi il pubblico di riferimento non avrebbe perdonato le dimenticanze o le forzature rispetto al testo originale (così, però, una trasposizione di ‘Guerra e pace’ durerebbe almeno dodici ore…). Tocca perciò accontentarsi di una pellicola in cui la regia diligente di Lawrence che però funziona meglio, anche a livello complessivo, di quella di Ross mette per immagini una storia più coerente e attenta alle sfumature della ‘lotta di classe’ rispetto a quella del primo film, oltre a ridurre la violenza che vi serpeggiava in maniera eccessiva: merito di un team di sceneggiatori nuovo di zecca composto da due che non sono gli ultimi arrivati come Simon Beaufroy ("Full Monty", "The Millionaire") e Michael Arndt ("Toy Story 3", "Little Miss Sunshine"). Insomma, nel complesso il giocattolone si fa apprezzare più del suo predecessore e lo stesso devono avere pensato in produzione, visto che regista e sceneggiatori sono stati confermati per il capitolo finale (che, accidenti alle strategie di marketing, arriverà in due puntate). Ovviamente ci saranno anche tutti i personaggi chiave della vicenda con i relativi volti: da quello bello e intenso di Jennifer Lawrence a quello ruvido dell’ex ‘assassino nato’ Woody Harrelson (il cui Haymitch ha qui ridotto il consumo di alcool) per finire a quelli con meno presonalità dei giovani protagonisti maschili anche se il nuovo arrivato Sam Claflin (Finnick) alza un po’ la media. Da notare, infine, la furba colonna sonora: oltre alla partitura di James Newton Howard, ecco spuntare Coldplay, Of Monsters and Man, The Lumineers (tutti sui titoli di coda), The National e molti altri, inclusa Patti Smith. Expand
  59. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    Outstanding! I love the books and I love this movie! Jennifer Lawrence brought it, as well as Woody, Donald Sutherland, Phillip Seymor Hoffman, Sam Caflin, and Josh Hutcherson. Although, the person who really stole the show was Jenna Malone as Johanna! She was fantastic! I can't wait to go see it again!
  60. Nov 24, 2013
    5
    As with many 2nd installments this falls short. Only "The Empire Strikes Back" ever got better. The first half is decent but then it falls apart. Doesn't live up to the book either...
  61. Nov 24, 2013
    6
    Seems like Hunger Games is becoming the next Matrix trilogy. Interesting and original first movie, followed by sequel that continues the story where it should be left at. Catching Fire has it moments but essentially it is watered down version of the previous one.
  62. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    All aspects of the movie completely improve upon the first film. Once again Jennifer Lawrence's flawless performance captures the whole film and leaves me wanting the next installment.
  63. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    Catching Fire got me, I liked it A LOT. But Peeta and Katness love story is kind of boring, except for the part that isn't real, that one is really cool. The movie is good, not awesome.
  64. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    A good sequel to one of the most beloved franchises of books and now movies. (I didn't read the books)
    I truly loved the first one. It was a very different experience I had at the movies and I won't ever forget it. After the end, I couldn't wait to see the sequel. I was highly anticipating it for the upcoming year and I couldn't wait to see it.
    First off, with the negatives. I felt
    A good sequel to one of the most beloved franchises of books and now movies. (I didn't read the books)
    I truly loved the first one. It was a very different experience I had at the movies and I won't ever forget it. After the end, I couldn't wait to see the sequel. I was highly anticipating it for the upcoming year and I couldn't wait to see it.
    First off, with the negatives. I felt disappointed though towards the end. The fast-paced scenes that were sometimes filler just felt random and out of the ordinary. On top of that, their were many instances in which I felt why a character would change for just a random reason without thinking. Like it didn't make sense. Such as the part on which the leader of the soldiers when they enter District 12, didn't even know who Katniss and Peeta were upon his arrival. Instead, he just seems as if they aren't big at all. It felt strange these parts that really didn't drag me into the world of the ex-US. Some of the writing was very cheesy and stupid but I quickly forgave these parts for the reasons in which these movies are so popular.
    The characters are a huge part for me in any story. The new and old characters felt stronger than they were before. The writing was on par mostly. The scenary and environment looked fantastic and had that feel of actually what it would look like. The rebellion scenes and the brainwashing government really had me captivated. The action was thrilling and impossible to guess how the story would go throughout the whole movie. It is the definition of a blockbuster hit most of the time. The thing that really got me was the acting of Jennifer Lawrence. She steals the show yet again on top of President Snow who you could never really guess the next trick he was going to pull out.
    So in the end, Catching Fire wasn't as strong as the first one but was a blockbluster hit that everyone should at least watch.
    Expand
  65. Sep 28, 2014
    7
    I don't think a movie aimed for teenage girls can be any better. In this view, 10/10 is deserved. But as an actual film, 7 seems fair to me. Maybe even 8.
  66. AGK
    Dec 26, 2013
    5
    (kissing noises) sorry I was kissing a girl a million times over which leads me to thew cons of this movie, it's a action sci fi sort of movie but there is so much kissing that it made me nearly fall asleep and it's long as hell but it wasn't all bad, when it actually got to the action it was great! seeing all that fighting kept me from drifting away into sleep, the action was just so good(kissing noises) sorry I was kissing a girl a million times over which leads me to thew cons of this movie, it's a action sci fi sort of movie but there is so much kissing that it made me nearly fall asleep and it's long as hell but it wasn't all bad, when it actually got to the action it was great! seeing all that fighting kept me from drifting away into sleep, the action was just so good that made halo look like a and the futuristic stuff looked cool too! overall the movie is ok. Expand
  67. Nov 27, 2013
    5
    THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE just never caught fire with me. Loved the first film but this just felt like a tepid remake. More of the same and I really missed so many of the intriguing sub-plots. We also totally lost the moral of a society that has children killing other children. Again, CATCHING FIRE is simply tepid. Not bad but just middlebrow.
  68. Nov 24, 2013
    7
    The movie is only decent. The casts are ridiculously different from the novel ones and Francis Lawnrence fails to bring the thrill of the original novel. Still fun and worth the money if you enjoyed the novel
  69. Nov 22, 2013
    6
    The visuals for Catching Fire are amazing, I enjoyed the books and thoroughly loved the concepts but I didn't enjoy the movie as much as I had hoped. The acting from the majority of actors and actresses was bland and lacked personality so the movie seemed to droll on.
  70. Nov 24, 2013
    10
    This new installment in the Hunger Games saga volunteers itself as tribute to excellent pace, drama and ingenuity. My experience with the film left me thinking I really knew Catniss and the world around her. This film also has a rare feature in that it speaks to almost all audiences with an emotional resonance not seen in most major motion pictures. The beginning and middle of the film,This new installment in the Hunger Games saga volunteers itself as tribute to excellent pace, drama and ingenuity. My experience with the film left me thinking I really knew Catniss and the world around her. This film also has a rare feature in that it speaks to almost all audiences with an emotional resonance not seen in most major motion pictures. The beginning and middle of the film, which do not take place in a fantastically designed and imagined Hunger Games arena are somehow far more emotionally engrossing than the conclusion of the film, which still held to a high standard of pace and drama.

    While I did not read the book, I found the story of this film fairly taught and thought out. The characters were far above expectations, even the new faces and the special effects and CGI of the film gave it an excitement and drive rare in movies like this. Catching Fire is red hot.
    Expand
  71. Nov 25, 2013
    4
    Read the books several times after seeing the first movie for which I thought was slow and forgettable. Best scene was when Rue died (actual tear came). Jennifer was good but really didn't do anything aggressive enough like a Nikita type character. Her co-stars, Josh and Liam, were/are not on her acting level, hell Josh isn't even tall enough or good looking enough to be believable as aRead the books several times after seeing the first movie for which I thought was slow and forgettable. Best scene was when Rue died (actual tear came). Jennifer was good but really didn't do anything aggressive enough like a Nikita type character. Her co-stars, Josh and Liam, were/are not on her acting level, hell Josh isn't even tall enough or good looking enough to be believable as a "love interest.' So, I ended up watching Battle Royale--the original. Had hopes of changes for Catching Fire. Like ebbs and flows of being caught up in the movie; pulling for Jennifer's character and her relationships. Show more intrigue in the politics with the Capital and the Districts. It's a YA book with depth that's not shown in the movie. Josh Hutcherson's character in the book, to me, is an Artiste with charm and striking flares of independence, but he plays him as "he" sees him: a wuss. He seems a bit insecure about his role (height difference, acting level, looks) which shows in his bland performance. Liam has no big role so it doesn't matter. Which districts did not believe the kids? One day of training? Director's decision: Do it like the book (reminder: it costs too much to add depth and meaning) and the fans will like it regardless. Lionsgate: Let's make monay! The Hunger Games Catching Fire is still forgettable but as boring as the first movie. Advantage: Book Trilogy. Expand
  72. Nov 26, 2013
    6
    The books are still better, although this movie was better than the first one. The plot here moved along well and it was entertaining and I was not bored to tears as in the first. All around a good but not great popcorn flick. See it for casual fun.
  73. Dec 10, 2013
    5
    I really enjoyed the first movie. It was new, exciting and entertaining. The one, for me, not all that wonderful. Don't get me wrong, the visual is stunning at times and the characters do have a certain intrigue about them. I'm not a fan of the series in that I've never read the books, and although I can't put my finger on why, about 20 minutes from the end all I could think was 'whenI really enjoyed the first movie. It was new, exciting and entertaining. The one, for me, not all that wonderful. Don't get me wrong, the visual is stunning at times and the characters do have a certain intrigue about them. I'm not a fan of the series in that I've never read the books, and although I can't put my finger on why, about 20 minutes from the end all I could think was 'when is this going to end?'. Worth a watch though, it just didn't excite me all that much. Expand
  74. Dec 31, 2013
    5
    Could've been better, overall I think it's because the first movie was good and I expected the second to be better It seemed to drag out after an hour
  75. Jan 3, 2014
    10
    Far better than the first one. Stunning visuals, interesting storyline & good acting all add up to make a pretty cool film. Haven't read the books but think I might give them a whirl after seeing the first two movies. Can't wait to see how the third one pans out!
  76. Feb 2, 2014
    7
    First thing I noticed about this film from its previous film is that Gary Ross did not direct this film, so it's obvious that we would see lots and lots of changes. The first change was the setting, in the first film District 12 was not so modern it seemed like District 12 was only couple of wooden houses and probably the only stone building was the Cathedral, but in the second filmFirst thing I noticed about this film from its previous film is that Gary Ross did not direct this film, so it's obvious that we would see lots and lots of changes. The first change was the setting, in the first film District 12 was not so modern it seemed like District 12 was only couple of wooden houses and probably the only stone building was the Cathedral, but in the second film District 12 was mostly of stone houses and buildings. The other thing I noticed but doesn't make sense is that "How is it possible for the game makers to see every little thing without a camera?".

    In the book the twist in the story was smooth and elegantly said but in the film it wasn't. One scene the game maker is with President Snow and the very next scene he is in the hover craft with Haymitch and people.

    I give 7 because I was impressed by the graphics and the overall flow of the film, I feel this could have been better with some logic. I wish the new directer keeps the flow and consistency the same with the up coming once.

    Overall it was a great entertainer and was not as gore as the previous one. I say it wasn't a waste of time and effort.
    Expand
  77. Jwv
    Jan 28, 2014
    8
    From the very start, you can see that Catching Fire is a much bigger production than The Hunger Games. It's a good thing the movie elaborates more on the relationship between Katniss and Prim, because we finally get to see some real feeling behind Katniss' motive, which is a thing that the book lacked. Secondly, I also like how the movie elaborates on the precarious situation the presidentFrom the very start, you can see that Catching Fire is a much bigger production than The Hunger Games. It's a good thing the movie elaborates more on the relationship between Katniss and Prim, because we finally get to see some real feeling behind Katniss' motive, which is a thing that the book lacked. Secondly, I also like how the movie elaborates on the precarious situation the president Snow is in, and how he copes with it. The movie does succeed in portraying an exotic lethal and especially dynamic arena, featuring great special effects, decors and non-stop action. The acting is good overall, although the two TV-commentators are amazingly flat characters, firing off meaningless and dull one-liners and acting ostentatiously. These are not the characters that Collins creates in the book that I criticize however, but the actual clumsiness by which the movie handles them. Actually every public appearance or speech of any kind is very empty of meaning and substance. In a repressive system where twelve districts are controlled (against their will) by a totalitarian regime, the power of propaganda should extend beyond the TV-set. What I mean is that not only the repetition of visual display of power is enough to sketch a believable world. The power of rhetoric is nowhere to be seen, which is a shame.

    The movie does in certain ways improve over the book (ie. providing different points of focalization) and it does a great job in compacting the book into a consistent two hour movie.
    Expand
  78. Mar 5, 2014
    3
    as much as hobitt 2 sucked this sucks more . i love suzzane collin's hunger games and i love hunger game movie . but this one is needs improvement i love the first one but this one stinks FYI there comming out with part 2 .
  79. Apr 2, 2014
    1
    probably a good book and story, but translate this into a movie and you get nothing worth watching. The first movie was basically the tournament or the condemned with kids, bad story but still entertaining to watch. The only problem is I had the same expectations from this movie, 1 hour of survival fights, since I just don't care about the story because of the first movie... Well guessprobably a good book and story, but translate this into a movie and you get nothing worth watching. The first movie was basically the tournament or the condemned with kids, bad story but still entertaining to watch. The only problem is I had the same expectations from this movie, 1 hour of survival fights, since I just don't care about the story because of the first movie... Well guess what, in this one they fight like 20 min and for the rest they talk about their totally bizar society that doesn't hold together and for one reason or another I hated every single one of the costumes in this movie. It's like we're set back 50 years. So yeah if u liked the story good for you but if you just watch this for the sake of entertainment you're going to fall a sleep. I really can't figure out what it is exactly but I really didn't like this movie. In my opinion this is just a really bad movie.

    just my opinion
    Expand
  80. Oct 1, 2014
    8
    Catching Fire has everything you would want from a blockbuster hit, but this movie is actually intelligently made with care. Some of the most important points from the book present themselves here, and subliminally the movie knows how good it is. All the actors and set pieces ooze confidence, and if you have not seen it yet, you should see it now.
  81. Nov 17, 2014
    7
    Usually when I watch a film adaptation of a book I find it hard to enjoy it. I’ve read the source material and am often comparing it to the book. Maybe it’s the fact that the book isn’t as fresh in my mind as with other film adaptations of books, maybe it’s the fact that the filmmakers actually cared about making a good movie, or maybe its both but this is one of those rare moments where IUsually when I watch a film adaptation of a book I find it hard to enjoy it. I’ve read the source material and am often comparing it to the book. Maybe it’s the fact that the book isn’t as fresh in my mind as with other film adaptations of books, maybe it’s the fact that the filmmakers actually cared about making a good movie, or maybe its both but this is one of those rare moments where I really enjoyed the adaptation. Often in Hollywood the adaptation is either an massively trimmed down version of the story (ex. the later Harry Potter films and Ender’s Game) or excessive padding (ex. The Hobbit films) so it is nice to see a film that does it right. Not only is Catching Fire a really good adaptation of a pretty solid book and in doing so creates a far superior sequel that serves as The Empire Strikes Back of the franchise (although Empire Strikes Back is in a whole different ball game). Even though by the time I’ve written this review the film has been out for almost a year this is a must watch for Hunger Games fans (both of the book and the film). Fans will be delighted to see a faithful adaptation of the book that hits most of the key points and for the most part is the book they remember (with some exceptions but nothing too distracting or annoying). The story covers most of the key moments and doesn’t gloss over too much, the characters are given time to breath and are well acted, and the direction is far superior to its predecessor. Catching Fire is one of those rare sequels that is better than its predecessor and one of those rare film adaptations of books that does its job well. With the franchise having two good films under its belt I worry about Mockingjay. With the third book being my least favorite this could be to Hunger Games what Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3: The Last Stand, and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End where to their franchise the threequel that ruined everything. It doesn’t help that is being split into two films. For now lets enjoy the middle installment, which will probably be remembered as the best of the franchise and good film in its own right. If you love the book and are worried this film will ruin it don’t this franchise is in good hands shame I can’t say the same for the Hobbit films. Expand
  82. Dec 16, 2013
    9
    Definitely the best action movie of the year, its subtle traps in ecstasy voltage, Jennifer Lawrence is doing very well and every time convincing me more as an actress. We definitely expect a splendid party culminated last one of the better designed trilogies century.
  83. Feb 13, 2014
    8
    A major improvement over the first installment. It has a better plot, better twists, more action, and more drama. Above all, it delves more into the setting in which the story takes place, as well the themes behind the story itself.

    It also retains the aspects of the first movie, like the great performances by Jennifer Lawrence and Woody Harrelson, while adding new just-as-great ones,
    A major improvement over the first installment. It has a better plot, better twists, more action, and more drama. Above all, it delves more into the setting in which the story takes place, as well the themes behind the story itself.

    It also retains the aspects of the first movie, like the great performances by Jennifer Lawrence and Woody Harrelson, while adding new just-as-great ones, most notably the late Philip Seymour Hoffman and Jena Malone. The directing is also very very good.

    Very glad to have watched this movie, especially that i wasn't very satisfied with its predecessor. Looking forward to Mockingjay.
    Expand
  84. Mar 20, 2014
    10
    A wonderful thrill ride of a sequel that vastly improves the first film in every way! As a reader of the book, I'm proud to say I really enjoyed this. Bring on Mockingjay Part 1!
  85. Jan 8, 2014
    7
    At the end of the first Hunger Games, we thought we could relax because our two heroes had won the games and managed to finagle their way out of having to decide which one would kill whom. Their threat to commit a double suicide rather than fight each other had led to the games being closed with two winners instead of only one, forcing the director of the games to commit hari-kari to saveAt the end of the first Hunger Games, we thought we could relax because our two heroes had won the games and managed to finagle their way out of having to decide which one would kill whom. Their threat to commit a double suicide rather than fight each other had led to the games being closed with two winners instead of only one, forcing the director of the games to commit hari-kari to save face. Now the two lovers are back in District 12, and their mandate is to tour all the districts to promote the 75th Hunger Games. However, the Nazi-like President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland, is getting restless and worried—Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) has become a symbol for the revolutionary spirit in Panem.

    Katniss's mockingjay pin has been adopted as the mark of the revolution, and the three-finger salute, the symbol of solidarity, is often raised in her presence. Snow wants her dead, but he fears her enough that he cannot kill her outright. Instead, he announces that the 75th year is a good excuse for a quarter-quell game, where the winners from all the previous 24 years will reunite and once again, fight to the death until there is only one man, or woman, standing. As Johanna Mason (Jena Malone) from District 7 notes, the players thought that after they won the game for their year, they would be rich and safe for life, and instead they have to go through the harrowing experience all over again. Ditto for the audience; it’s emotionally exhausting to have to go through the games all over again.

    This time the simulated reality includes poisonous fog, murderous monkeys, and bloody rain. The new games director, Plutarch Heavensbee (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman), seems to be keen on achieving Snow’s wish to make sure that Katniss is killed during the games. But the plot emphasis in Hunger Games 2 is not the games, even though they are revisited and are almost as unnerving as ever. In Part 2 of the Hunger Games, it is the revolutionary spirit of the people that is the main thrust of the film. President Snow is correct in his assessment that Katniss is a symbolic force to be reckoned with; the people are rallying around her, and the revolution is rumbling.

    The love story between Katniss and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) is at first dismissed as an act that the two devised as a sort of reality television show. Back in District 12, Katniss continues to pursue her amorous bond with Gale Hawthorne, played by Liam Hemsworth, her true love. But there is a twist in the plot when Katniss and Peeta reunite as an affianced couple who may end up having to kill each other at the end of the games. This time the romantic act becomes real.

    Hunger Games is a trilogy, and thus the open-ended finale to this film was unavoidable as we are obliged to wait for Act 3 to finish the story. However, the original Hunger Games did a better job of providing both a satisfactory ending and a lead-in to the next installment, whereas Hunger Games 2 seems to end, quite literally, in mid-air. The performances are strong and the sets are lavish, but much of the plot interest has been generated by the excellence of Part 1, whose mythic ambiance continues to enthrall. The Day of the Revolution is an interesting dystopian theme for Part 2, but the tension of the revolutionary idealism has been somewhat subdued in favor of the repetition of the games, which in this film are not quite as daring, intense, or as purposeful as the first time around. Nevertheless, the themes of social injustice are well executed once again—including the dictatorial suppression of civil liberties, the unacceptable distribution of wealth, and the insanity displayed by the bizarre fashion, make-up, and hairstyles of the extravagantly and absurdly rich.
    Expand
  86. Apr 16, 2014
    9
    Besides from having some dull performances from some supporting cast members, having some unrealistic life-saving coincidences and the occasional lack of logic, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is better than its great predecessor, proving to be bigger and more thrilling and providing a powerhouse performance by Jennifer Lawrence and a fabulous performance by Stanley Tucci. A rare sequelBesides from having some dull performances from some supporting cast members, having some unrealistic life-saving coincidences and the occasional lack of logic, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is better than its great predecessor, proving to be bigger and more thrilling and providing a powerhouse performance by Jennifer Lawrence and a fabulous performance by Stanley Tucci. A rare sequel that surpasses it's predecessor, albeit not having the emotional impact of the original. Expand
  87. Jan 1, 2014
    10
    Much better than the first movie and I really enjoyed that one. Unlike the Hobbit that is also showing at this time this movie follows the book fairly closely. I just re-read the series a few months ago knowing that this movie was coming out. I think that the special effects were well done and the acting was above average. I look forward to the third book part one?!
  88. Jun 13, 2014
    8
    It kept me excited but also provided food for thought. I love how the whole of it reflects back on the viewer... we witness first-hand how seductively entertaining a show like Hunger Games would be. But while watching the show, we get the benefit of seeing through the lies and peaking into the backstage drama, which has more depth in this sequel. The ending surprised me. Recommended!
  89. Jan 2, 2014
    4
    One of the most overrated movies. I don't know what intrigues people about this movie. It is an ok film but nothing spectacular. The first part was better in my opinion but again overrated
  90. Apr 3, 2014
    8
    Catching fire is a movie based on the second book of the hunger games trilogy.
    It actually managed to stay true to the source material even though it could be difficult to follow for newcomers. Some cuts had to be made in order to fit in the movie-time vs book-time but they do not harm the story flow.
    Katniss Everdeen is the main character, surviving the first deadly edition of the
    Catching fire is a movie based on the second book of the hunger games trilogy.
    It actually managed to stay true to the source material even though it could be difficult to follow for newcomers. Some cuts had to be made in order to fit in the movie-time vs book-time but they do not harm the story flow.
    Katniss Everdeen is the main character, surviving the first deadly edition of the hunger games and now trying to find a way to elaborate what happened to her while trying to move on with her life.
    What she doesn't know is that her actions are inspiring a revolt in the whole world, so she must decide if obeying the capitol rules or be the "mockingjay" and be the embodyment of the spark of the rebellion.
    The story is captivating from start to finish, new additions to the cast are welcome and well rounded enough to be likable and relatable.
    Main problem is that it ends on a big cliffhanger wich will see its resolutions in the two upcoming films.
    Expand
  91. Apr 11, 2014
    10
    I like science fiction. I like post apocalyptic stories. I like dystopian stories. I like smart original stories. I like the Hunger Games. It's a fine story about an Atheist utopia where everyone's happy and peaceful and life is good without gawd.
  92. May 19, 2015
    7
    Although a very entertaining The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is not as exciting of a return to the world of the Hunger Games as one would like. A large flaw, like in the original film, is that the directing and writing seems to be centered around maintaining a PG-13 rating. However the movie is still solid and continues to have great acting jobs by the entire cast, and keeps the viewAlthough a very entertaining The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is not as exciting of a return to the world of the Hunger Games as one would like. A large flaw, like in the original film, is that the directing and writing seems to be centered around maintaining a PG-13 rating. However the movie is still solid and continues to have great acting jobs by the entire cast, and keeps the view excited to see the next installation in the series. Expand
  93. Dec 20, 2014
    10
    Absolute perfection.Best of its series, best of its genre, beyond science fiction and adventure, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is a thrilling dark drama.
  94. May 29, 2014
    7
    Once again I liked the pre-games dystopian sequences, but this times the games were more intense and the whole story becomes more complex. I like the fact that the plot moves from hunger games to revolution. Overall, this part is slightly better than the first movie.
  95. Dec 9, 2013
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Making comparisons, it’s undeniable that “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” has overcome the first film of several possible ways. It is by far the best movie adaptation I’ve ever watched. Director Francis Lawrence (who thankfully also took charge of the two parts of “Mockingjay”) followed to the letter the most important events of the book. I believe that if Francis would've taken the whole saga, the first film would be even more rewarding for all of us.

    The implementation of the scenes of the tour, followed by the act of the Peacemakers’ violence in District 12 (Gale can say so!), Katniss finding out she has to return to the arena, the training, the scenes inside the arena, with the fog, the monkey mutts, and the jabberjays (I loved that scene). I just can’t describe how amazing this movie is.
    Expand
  96. Aug 23, 2014
    7
    This was definitely a step up from the first Hunger games. It gets deeper into whats going on outside of the games and that caught my interest. The ending makes you me believe the next one will be a step even better.
  97. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    It may be decidedly more grave than expected, but with such sobering thematic elements in play, the gravity is just the point. "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" is a thrilling, brilliant, and carefully acted sociopolitical sci-fi action epic.
  98. Feb 10, 2014
    9
    The second instalment has more drama, conflict, engaging characters, and a vicious arena. A way is found to return the champions to the battlefield. But nothing is really what it seems to be. There are layers under which the different characters are working.

    Catching Fire takes the conflict steadily away from being everything about who survives in the arena to the larger issue, which is
    The second instalment has more drama, conflict, engaging characters, and a vicious arena. A way is found to return the champions to the battlefield. But nothing is really what it seems to be. There are layers under which the different characters are working.

    Catching Fire takes the conflict steadily away from being everything about who survives in the arena to the larger issue, which is the tyranny of the Capitol. Katniss, for the sake of the audience, doesn't know much about what is being plotted in secret, mainly because she isn't the most discrete and patient of people.

    Gale Hawthorne is developed further before the focus once again returns to Katniss and Peeta. Both of them must form alliances if they hope to have one of them survive. Finnick and Johanna breathe some life into an otherwise stagnant narrative. They are both cocky and witty and peculiar, and talented in the art of killing. Beetee is skilled with the use of electricity. Haymitch is much more cunning and resolved this time around. He seems to have a purpose he is keeping from both Katniss and Peeta.

    President Snow wants Katniss to make the people of the districts believe that it was true love that made her want to eat the berries alongwith Peeta at the end of their previous expedition into the arena. People are taking her deathwish for a display of defiance. For her part she wants to cooperate so they would leave her and her family in peace. She just wants to live the rest of her life recovering from the mental damage she has suffered from killing all those people. But it isn't working and Snow finds another way for quelling the hopes of the inhabitants of the districts.

    Hoffman plays the new gamemaker hired by Snow. He is tasked with arranging Katniss's death so the whole issue about the mockingjay would go away. He lives up to his name in his last performance of his life. Sadly we won't be able to see his character in the next two instalments.

    The stakes are higher than the lives of both the characters. It is freedom that is the goal here and the movie ends in a way which would leave the viewers in no doubt about where the story is headed. The promise is large and I hope that they deliver. I know the last book was a bit underwhelming, so some modifications would have to be made to keep the following two sequels interesting. The theme discussed is the same as before_ human suffering though poverty, hunger, war and persecution.

    They did everything they could have with this instalment. The budget was bigger. The set design, visual effects, costumes and weapons more impressive. But the reason the movie succeeds is they also went bigger with the characters. They felt more lively and real. If this instalment is any indication, the next two films are going to earn huge sums of money too. Catching Fire has turned the franchise very lucrative.

    9.5
    Expand
  99. Mar 24, 2014
    5
    Kind of funny that the Hunger games of this movie only happen just over 80 minutes in. Plus this movie's version is ALLOT tamer and shorter than the first movie.

    For the most part this movies real focus is the politic and the aftermath of the first movie. Storytelling and character development of the central characters is done well enough. However, there is little development of side
    Kind of funny that the Hunger games of this movie only happen just over 80 minutes in. Plus this movie's version is ALLOT tamer and shorter than the first movie.

    For the most part this movies real focus is the politic and the aftermath of the first movie. Storytelling and character development of the central characters is done well enough. However, there is little development of side characters, which makes me wonder why did they bother to have so many?

    The shaky cam of the first movie is gone, but then again there is little need for it either.

    Overall:
    Catching Fire does have a bit more plot and a better overall story arch than the first movie. It expands on the universe and leaves you wanting more (which is coming.) However, in the end Catching Fire failed to really impress and felt more like this should have been made into a epilogue for the first movie and a prologue to the next. On it's own, it mostly feels like filler that easily could have been condensed and could have used some better overall writing.
    Expand
  100. Feb 7, 2014
    8
    Whatever you say I am not a big fan of this franchise. I did not like much the first installment other than a decent entertainment. So this was another 'let it go' movie from me. But when the time came to see it, I was a little surprised of being better than the first. The second hour was good and before one was a mild slow. The real interest is the, follow-up movies from here on. The endWhatever you say I am not a big fan of this franchise. I did not like much the first installment other than a decent entertainment. So this was another 'let it go' movie from me. But when the time came to see it, I was a little surprised of being better than the first. The second hour was good and before one was a mild slow. The real interest is the, follow-up movies from here on. The end of this part created a curiosity for the next movies of the series. Looks like it would be very interesting with big changes in story than first two.

    The movie series supposed to be a trilogy, but you know it tasted big commercial success that mean big buck in filmmakers pocket. In 2013 this movie was the highest gross from north America. So like 'Deathly Hollows' and 'Breaking Dawn' this franchise following the same path by breaking the third volume into two. Whatever, I am expecting the third and the fourth movies 'Mockingjay part I and II' would have more exciting than previous movies with many twists and turns.

    It was so sad to hear about Philip Seymour's sudden tragic demise. His best parts are yet to come in the next movies of the movie series. The franchise told they wrapped most of his portions of the last two volumes and now they decided to make minor changes in his character. That's good to hear, hope he it will be an unforgettable show from the great actor.

    The end scene before the credits roll the logo of 'Catching Fire' changes into 'Mockingjay'. It was awesome, I just sensed some great is ahead. So like teenagers, it interested me and created curiosity. Looks like I got reason to watch 'Mockingjay' movies.

    7.5/10
    Expand
Metascore
75

Generally favorable reviews - based on 47 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 47
  2. Negative: 0 out of 47
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Nov 25, 2013
    50
    Yet, despite the good acting, the middle section of the film, set at the Capitol, is attenuated and rhythmless — the filmmakers seem to be touching all the bases so that the trilogy’s readers won’t miss anything.
  2. Reviewed by: Susan Wloszczyna
    Nov 22, 2013
    75
    With each on-screen chapter, the poor girl from District 12 continues to fulfill her destiny as an inspiration and a rebel fighter. She is but one female, but she's the perfect antidote to the surplus of male superheroes out there.
  3. Reviewed by: Ian Buckwalter
    Nov 22, 2013
    79
    Everything that felt clumsy in The Hunger Games has been improved upon here. That's most apparent in the clarity of the action, but it also extends to how efficiently the film establishes so many new ensemble members.